Robert A. Slovak vs Golf Course Villas Homeowners Association, et al

Filing 351

ORDER granting ECF Nos. 340 and 344 Motions to Seal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carla Baldwin on 8/19/2021. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SC)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3

***

4

ROBERT A. SLOVAK,

5
6
7
8
9

Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 3:13-CV-0569-MMD-CLB
ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO SEAL
[ECF No. 340 & 344]

GOLF COURSE VILLAS
HOMEOWNERS’ ASSOCIATION, et al.,
Defendants.

10

Before the Court are two motions to seal. (ECF Nos. 340 & 344.) Plaintiff filed a

11

motion to file his emergency motion to continue evidentiary hearing under seal. (ECF No.

12

341.) Plaintiff’s emergency motion to continue contains medical information and records

13

of the Plaintiff, his counsel, and an expert witness. (ECF No. 341). Wells Fargo also filed

14

a motion to seal its opposition to the emergency motion to continue evidentiary hearing,

15

(ECF No. 345), due to its reference to the same medical information. (ECF No. 344.)

16

“The courts of this country recognize a general right to inspect and copy public

17

records and documents, including judicial records and documents.” Courthouse News

18

Serv. v. Planet, 947 F.3d 581, 591 (9th Cir. 2020) (quoting Courthouse News Serv. v.

19

Brown, 908 F.3d 1063, 1069 (7th Cir. 2018)). Certain documents are exceptions to this

20

right and are generally kept secret for policy reasons, including grand jury transcripts and

21

warrant materials in a pre-indictment investigation. United States v. Bus. of Custer

22

Battlefield Museum & Store Located at Interstate 90, Exit 514, S. of Billings, Mont., 658

23

F.3d 1188, 1192 (9th Cir. 2011) (quoting Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d

24

1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006)).

25

If a party seeks to file a document under seal, there are two possible standards the

26

party must address: the compelling reasons standard or the good cause standard. See

27

Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1096-97 (9th Cir. 2016). The

28

choice between the two standards depends on whether the documents proposed for

1

sealing accompany a motion that is “more than tangentially related” to the merits of the

2

case. Id. at 1099. If it is more than tangentially related, the compelling reasons standard

3

applies. If not, the good cause standard applies. Ctr. for Auto Safety, 809 F.3d at 1102.

4

Here, the parties seek to file documents under seal in connection with the

5

emergency motion to continue evidentiary hearing, (ECF No. 341), which is not “more

6

than tangentially related” to the merits of the case. In fact, it is not related to the merits of

7

this case in any way. Therefore, the less exacting good cause standard applies.

8

Here, the referenced documents contain the sensitive health information of three

9

individuals. (ECF No. 341 & 345.) Balancing the need for the public’s access to

10

information related to the medical history, treatment, and condition of the three individuals

11

mentioned in the emergency motion to continue evidentiary hearing against the need to

12

maintain the confidentiality of the individuals medical information weighs in favor of

13

sealing these documents. For good cause appearing, the motions to seal, (ECF Nos. 340

14

& 344), are GRANTED.

15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16

August 19, 2021
DATED: _____________________

17
18

____________________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2